Author Topic: Discussion with Bp. Fellay (John Lanes posts) (Read 4505 times)

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #15 on:** August 08, 2012, 02:35:17 AM »

One more detail:

On those "renewed excommunications" :

This is why the excoms should not have been "lifted." It was widely stated that
Rome was going to annul the excoms. But that didn't happen, did it? No.

Now here we are. If the excoms had been annulled, instead of "lifted," we would
be in a much better position. Why? Because the excoms were FAKE all along.
They never existed in the first place. And to be honest, they should be known
as such, which is what an annulment does. "They never happened," is what an
annulment says about them.

Then the excoms for +Lefebvre and +de Castro Mayer would be gone as well.
As it is, they are still haunting history without any resting place. Two holy bishops
whose memory is tarnished by this blight that never happened.

So in the future, any such "lifting" should be thrown right back at the lying scuм
who issues it, and an annulment should be demanded, or "shut up."

This is war.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #16 on:** August 25, 2012, 03:38:01 AM »

Wait a minute. I take it all back. I've been dishing out WAY TOO MUCH SLACK for
+Fellay. He doesn't deserve it. He's been working up to this, step by deliberate
step, for many years now. This is not him being victimized. It's all about US being
victimized BY HIM.

There's a new thread that explains everything:

http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Dirty-political-campaign-2

sspxbvm · « **Reply #17 on:** August 26, 2012, 09:25:32 AM »

We have always said that Bishop Fellay should know already what the media can do to a person because of the butchering of Bishop Williamson. And yet Bishop Fellay went and did something far worse that Bishop Williamson in that he caused scandal amongst the faithful. It should be important enough for him that he would make several visits (United States included) and retract that horrible interview. The effort is lack luster.

Reading that recent "interview" is dangerous for those of us who are trying to see something good in Bishop Fellay. Something that will defend his cause sufficiently so we can trust him again. Each time the bishop pushes the faithful further and further away.

Come now, Bishop Fellay, you are a grown man. You should have avoided the media and instead try those lines on a large crowd of SSPX faithful. Would like to have seen the outcome.

Clelia · « **Reply #18 on:** August 26, 2012, 01:04:54 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

One more detail:

On those "renewed excommunications" :

This is why the excoms should not have been "lifted." It was widely stated that
Rome was going to annul the excoms. But that didn't happen, did it? No.

Now here we are. If the excoms had been annulled, instead of "lifted," we would
be in a much better position. Why? Because the excoms were FAKE all along.
They never existed in the first place. And to be honest, they should be known
as such, which is what an annulment does. "They never happened," is what an
annulment says about them.

Then the excoms for +Lefebvre and +de Castro Mayer would be gone as well.
As it is, they are still haunting history without any resting place. Two holy bishops
whose memory is tarnished by this blight that never happened.

So in the future, any such "lifting" should be thrown right back at the lying scuм
who issues it, and an annulment should be demanded, or "shut up."

This is war.

THESE FACTS SO IMPORTANT FOR THE NOVUS ORDOS TO KNOW: it may not convert the masses, but it might hopefully open a great many minds to what has happened. (I can dream, can't I?)

Instead, the n.o.'s in the pews are being led down the Primrose Lane not only by n.o. bishops, priests, and religious, but now, also by Bishop Fellay and his minion.

(Brace yourself) Tele's right: :surprised: Bishop Fellay ought to come out and CLARIFY his position if he believes his words were cut and pasted into an agenda he did not intend.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #19 on:** August 27, 2012, 03:10:57 PM »

Clelia,

You really are a beautiful soul.

PAT317 · « **Reply #20 on:** August 27, 2012, 05:47:35 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote
Quote
For example, on religious liberty he said he was conscious of his audience, Americans, for whom "Religious liberty is their first dogma!" and he was putting an argument ad hominem to them, citing V2 and pointing out that even that does not teach the religious liberty which Conciliarists preach and believe.

Taking this out of its context, CNS made it appear that Bishop Fellay was giving his own assessment of Dignitatis Humanae. He wasn't.

So now +Fellay decides to cozy up to the Americanist heresy, defined and
condemned over a century ago, yet now it's suddenly okay? And we're supposed
to roll over and take it? What's with this? Does he think we're this stupid?

The mere fact that a lot of Americans are too poorly educated in the Faith to know that Americanism is a defined heresy, +Fellay, who is not an American, and ought to know better, instead of taking this opportunity to educate (in which case, of course, the smarmy CNS editor would have deleted this segment, but whatever!) He chose instead to take sides with a CONDEMNED HERESY in order to "get along" with Americans in ERROR, and now this is an EXCUSE????

The CNS editor allowed this comment by a seminarian to stay in:

Quote

The decisive factor in making my decision was the reception of Vatican II. There were in Vatican II some points like religious freedom or ecuмenism that were completely incompatible with the traditional teaching of the Church before the council. And because of that it seemed logical for me me to enter a society that openly opposes and criticizes those doctrinal errors that are dangerous to the Catholic Faith.

Go to about 2:05 minutes. Why is this seminarian able to say things so clearly, and not be edited out by CNS? If an seminarian can do it, why can't the Superior General?